[Goose]

Agree.

I chalk it up to the size of the playbook and giving the QB 2 sometimes three plays. JH had the same issue. It probably cost him a SB. (Not sure he still does. Haven’t followed Mich that closely)

Cut down the playbook and perhaps this becomes less of a problem. It is an issue that needs to be addressed. 

[quote author=teejers1 link=topic=18450.msg219836#msg219836 date=1514656088]
On DOG penalties, Matt Squeri on TOS did an exhaustive review of every Pac 12 team.  The conclusions comport with what your eyes told you:  Stanford ran fewer plays than any other conference team and had more DOG penalties.  [And this analysis did not include the number of timeouts  taken to avoid DOG penalties].  It's a pretty obvious red flag of ineptitude on the O side of the ball . . . isn't it?  [There are few things more inept than not even being able to get a play called and run within the time allotted].

[/quote]
I agree the issue needs to be addressed. I suspect that the QBs are graded on how well they select the correct play. Sometimes, when the clock is running down, it is too late to change the play, bad though it may be. For some reason, the QBs just keep trying to change the play/blocking/etc when there isn't enough time left to do that. There should be a hard threshold, like 4 seconds, where you live with what you have. I think that would eliminate a whole lot of the DOGs. It may be that the coaches think first and 15 is better than second and 12, and therefore would prefer to attempt to always run the "right" play, knowing that sometimes we will get a DOG in the attempt. If that is the case, we need to read the defense faster, and that needs to be a priority. Let's face it, most PAC-12 defenses aren't that complex. It shouldn't take 10 seconds to figure out what they are in. Teams like WSU who shift a lot may be a problem in that regard, but if we can force them to guess when we will snap the ball, that should help. Right now, they can pretty much count on us not playing "fast".

[Goose]

Agree.

I chalk it up to the size of the playbook and giving the QB 2 sometimes three plays. JH had the same issue. It probably cost him a SB. (Not sure he still does. Haven’t followed Mich that closely)

Cut down the playbook and perhaps this becomes less of a problem. It is an issue that needs to be addressed. 

[quote author=teejers1 link=topic=18450.msg219836#msg219836 date=1514656088]
On DOG penalties, Matt Squeri on TOS did an exhaustive review of every Pac 12 team.  The conclusions comport with what your eyes told you:  Stanford ran fewer plays than any other conference team and had more DOG penalties.  [And this analysis did not include the number of timeouts  taken to avoid DOG penalties].  It's a pretty obvious red flag of ineptitude on the O side of the ball . . . isn't it?  [There are few things more inept than not even being able to get a play called and run within the time allotted].

[/quote]
I agree the issue needs to be addressed. I suspect that the QBs are graded on how well they select the correct play. Sometimes, when the clock is running down, it is too late to change the play, bad though it may be. For some reason, the QBs just keep trying to change the play/blocking/etc when there isn't enough time left to do that. There should be a hard threshold, like 4 seconds, where you live with what you have. I think that would eliminate a whole lot of the DOGs. It may be that the coaches think first and 15 is better than second and 12, and therefore would prefer to attempt to always run the "right" play, knowing that sometimes we will get a DOG in the attempt. If that is the case, we need to read the defense faster, and that needs to be a priority. Let's face it, most PAC-12 defenses aren't that complex. It shouldn't take 10 seconds to figure out what they are in. Teams like WSU who shift a lot may be a problem in that regard, but if we can force them to guess when we will snap the ball, that should help. Right now, they can pretty much count on us not playing "fast".